As you know if you are a regular reader at NewsBusters, we've been discussing this so-called "health care reform" issue for at least seven months, in more than 500 fact-filled and informative posts. You can find that discussion here....and if you are new to this forum topic, I'd suggest you brew a nice pot of coffee, clean your glasses, and reserve a couple of hours to get an education on a myriad of issues surrounding the great health care debate of our time.
As of Saturday, Bela Pelosi and her criminal gang have twisted enough arms and thrown enough money around (Can you say $130 million for your vote, Congressman, for your California medical school? I knew you could!) to pass this abonination of a bill, it's time for us to regroup and figure out what is next on the agenda.
As with the first forum, this is a serious subject for serious people. All are welcome, but trolls are not, nor will trollishness or thread-derailing, flaming, or name-calling be tolerated.
As a couple of starting points....What are the true outrages in this bill? (Yes, we all know it's unconstitutional). Specifics, please. Cite Section(s) and Para(s). What are the tactics we need to use now? Groups to be pressured now? Methodology? Money? Feel free to add topics...that was just a starting point.
Okay, we now begin again....let's roll!




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I think it's all working
November 10, 2009 - 00:23 ET by BlondeI've crossed linked the old Forum topic.....kindly let me know if we're in business or not.
Time to defeat the enemy....Barack Hussein (mmm mmm mmm) and the rest of the socialist Congresscritters who'd yoke us with Obamacare.
I hope he fails, too.
Blonde:Thank you for
November 10, 2009 - 02:15 ET by stratmanBlonde:
Thank you for creating this new forum thread. Everything seems to be working well so far.
I do not trust the media comments on the Senate being nowhere near passing this abomination. We all know there will be alterations, arm-twistings and bribes by Reid and Obama to pass this Leftist wish list. Opposition must be intensified. There can be no letting down or giving in. The Leftists have asked for the proverbial inch but taken a mile.
At work today, I took a mental note of how many seniors carried AARP Supplemental for their Medicare insurance. Several did. I wonder how many know the financial end game of AARP as the reason for AARP supporting ObamaCare. Do they really support ObamaCare and AARP, or is it the infirmaties of old age that cloud investigation and decision-making?
Thanks again for the new forum. I hope Par finds his way here soon. We need some hard news for our grinder.
Unmitgated Gall
November 12, 2009 - 19:55 ET by BlondeWe received a "rah rah look how great I am" e-mail today from Ron (Pelosi) Klien, D-Florida....touting his vote for the great Health Care Reform bill he helped to ram through the House late Saturday night (wow....what a proud moment).
He even had an agree/disagree with his vote poll....but of course it didn't work. D'oh! Just like he phoned in his Town Hall meeting this fall, the moron.
So we sent him an e-mail:
I hope he fails, too.
LOL!
November 14, 2009 - 16:08 ET by stratmanHome run, B.
Reid puts House healthcare bill on Senate calendar
November 11, 2009 - 10:55 ET by Par for the CourseThe procedural votes are going to be interesting.
Immigration reform re-emerges in the health care debate.
November 12, 2009 - 10:13 ET by Par for the CourseI was wondering when immigration reform would re-emerge in the health care debate.
I wonder what type of bribe is going to be offered to get the advocacy groups on board.
Every kind of bribe imaginable
November 12, 2009 - 19:48 ET by BlondeCongress has all of this unused TARP and Stimulus money lying around...they'll use it for anything and everything they can think of to buy votes.
Thanks for this link. I should send a note to Wilson....thanking him for his outburst forcing the issue:
They'll sneak illegals and abortion back into the bill if it gets that far. Book it.
Glad you found us Par.
I hope he fails, too.
Hi B
November 12, 2009 - 21:55 ET by shawn228First of all thank you for creating this new thread. It was extremely hard separating new and old comments.
Secondly what do you and others think the chances of Obamacare or a slightly watered down version of Obama care will pass and become law before the 2010 elections?
I think shawn
November 13, 2009 - 08:58 ET by BlondeThose sneaky rat bastards will do anything and everything to pass this abomination, including using the nuclear option. They no longer care what we think or want, they lie to our face(s), and they have a giginormous slush fund made up of leftover TARP and stimulus money to buy the votes they need (one Cali rep who was a firm no vote was bought off by $130 million allocation for a university).
If I were you, I'd think about moving back to Canada.
I hope he fails, too.
To be honest
November 13, 2009 - 09:07 ET by shawn228I have been considering my options, but I would have to give up my retirement money and I would still have to pay taxes to the US, even If I had a job in another country.
It is a real shame that they don't even pretend to go after bi partisian support anymore and want to shove this plan down our throats and put us even more in debt.
Slick Nancy.
November 13, 2009 - 16:12 ET by Par for the CourseI wonder if she thought she could get away with this without anybody noticing.
The rest of the article explains how Nancy did it, along with this comment from Representative Price.
Hat Tip: Hot Air
Congress to Healthcare Market: Drop Dead
November 13, 2009 - 18:23 ET by Par for the CourseSeven examples follow, but when I saw No 6, I had to post this article to see if Strat has any thoughts about Concierge medicine:
Random Thoughts
November 15, 2009 - 13:53 ET by stratmanPar:
The article did not mention that concierge practice patients receive the one commodity we all want – more time with the physician. The concierge patient may receive many minutes per visit. I have read about 2 hour annual physicals instead of the typical 30-45 minutes. Now that’s “old school” medicine revived, and a good thing. The more time a patient has to express themselves, the more time a physician has to learn about their patients, the better healthcare can be.Concierge practices are an interesting push back phenomena to the grind of increasingly externally controlled and hectic nature the practice of medicine is today. ObamaCare may increase the numbers of this type of practice.Initially, and probably still, physicians that shed various types of insurance plans were considered pariahs. It is considered bad form/unprofessional to dump patients by this type of exclusionary process. IMO, part of the angst was based on anxiety over picking up someone else's slack, the newly released patients, many of which were feared to be part of poorer reimbursing insurer pools.In order to begin a concierge practice, the general gestalt is
I have no problem with physicians choosing to try a concierge practice. Why would I deny someone else's liberty and freedom to practice how they choose. Since it doesn't follow the Liberal Socialized Healthcare or the Traditionalist paradigms of taking all comers it must be demonized. Yet these groups also exclude patients from their panels based on age, payer status, type of insurance and even medical condition. Nearly every physician does. The ones that don't are most likely subsidized in order to stay in business.
Bottom-line: Fine by me.
The CCH briefing is a decent summary.
November 15, 2009 - 09:42 ET by Par for the CourseThe CCH briefing (pdf) is a decent summary on the employer and Medicare and Medicaid related provisions of House Bill HR 3962.
I tend to disagree with Paul Clark when he says:
I haven't seen the Federal Government demonstrate its ability to encourage efficient and cost-savings practices in the past, so I'm skeptical of its ability to do so in the future.
I tend to disagree with
November 15, 2009 - 13:14 ET by stratmanIt is true in one aspect, but in an indirect fashion. When the Government reduces reimbursements, the private insurers tend to follow. The rest of the claims are patently false as you noted.
The Medicare, Medicaid Affected portion was both laughable and troubling for its absurd promotion of so-called "savings" in light affecting improvements.
Not only will this negatively impact recruitment for new physicians, it will also de-motivate current physicians to see Government patients. Everyone loses eventually (unless you don't care about physician or old people or poor people).
What does this do for saving taxpayers money? Looks like this is one area meant to show Government compassion. Unfortunately, the Government must steal more from taxpayers or else cut other payouts elsewhere to fund it. Some win, many others lose.
Physicians are very discriminating in whom they admit already. This isn't the 1970's or earlier where people were admitted for yearly physicals for a couple of days. The most likely threat behind this statement is not reimbursing hospitals and physicians for an already increasing laundry list of diagnoses. Humans are not widgets that can be reliably expected to perform thus and such. Good health is not a given.
This, like everything else discussed, isn't new. Government will further "redistribute" money in a variety of fashions. There are shortages of specialists, despite what the Media tells you, outside of large urban/suburban centers. Government cutting their reimbursements will make it even more difficult to find timely and competent care for patients. Also, expect further calls to have physician extenders provide more care and with less physician oversight. Cheaper - yes. Better - you decide. I also expect loosening of medical school requirments for admission and large influxes of foreign medical graduates if Government determines the number of physicians are inadequate for coverage. Welcome to the dummying down of Medicine.
Yep. The money, hours, paperwork and risk are directly responsible for these trends. (eg Family Medicine, with graph here). A cursory look at other "general" residency slots - Pediatrics and Internal Medicine - do not explicitly reflect this trend, though. A recent article by the very Liberal Robert Wood Johnson Foundation states that the House's bill calls for a 10% increase in FP reimbursement, which means someone else would be cut as the Government views this as a zero-sum game. The president of the American Academy of Family Physicians states a 30% increase is needed to motivate more students into family medicine careers. Harry Reid, in his supreme intelligence, suggests adding 15,000 more residency slots.*** His idea died a quick death when the cost was revealed. Once again, Dingy Harry thinks governmental intrusion on free markets will solve all ills. Didn't work in the USSR and it won't work in the US... unless we are "compelled", and by "compelled" I mean forced.
THIS is their big savings?!? Wheelchairs?!?
Note that the cost is eventually shifted back on to the patient. One hand giveth while the other hand taketh away. Screw the crippled, huh ObamaPelosiReidCare?
Oh goody! More witch hunts and intimidation, not to mention retro-active repayments of past reimbursments.
Incrementalism. The hubris that one thinks they know more than everyone else, ever. The rotten stench of Socialism. It never ends with the Left.
*** Medical School Admissions Up, Residency Slots Stay Flat
Call me skeptical.
November 16, 2009 - 07:37 ET by Par for the CourseI wonder if anybody really believed her.
Healthcare accord with drug industry may be going sour
November 17, 2009 - 08:27 ET by Par for the CourseI saw an earlier press release from PhRMA when the House Bill was passed:
I can't help thinking that this legislation allows the Government to choose winners and losers. It looks like spending $110 Million on lobbying this year doesn't guarantee you'll be a winner.
And therein lies the problem, Par
November 17, 2009 - 08:35 ET by BlondeThose bloody legislators just won't stay bribed. And these democrats just can't restrain themselves from stealing everything in sight. Nanny's Health Care Bill is Grand Larceny, Writ Large.
I truly hope they overreach to the point that the whole thing fails miserably, and then next year we vote them all out. It will be an object lesson that even a stupid and avaricious politician will be able to keep in long term memory.
I hope he fails, too.
Those for H.R. 3961
November 17, 2009 - 18:19 ET by Par for the CourseAnd those against H.R. 3961
November 17, 2009 - 18:23 ET by Par for the CourseThose for H.R. 3961 won.
November 20, 2009 - 07:55 ET by Par for the CourseH.R. 3961 The Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act of 2009
The November 4, 2009 CBO report on H.R. 3961:
Even though they added PayGo to this bill, I think the $210 Billion should be added to the House Health Bill to show the true cost of health care reform.
We do not need health care reform
November 19, 2009 - 14:09 ET by HumboltWant to participate in the discussion of how to mount a coordinated bulwark against the latest tidal wave of socialism in the form of the Barama-nation health care bill. However, I may not be able to strictly adhere to all of Blonde's suggested points for our agenda. One difficulty I have with the health-care "debate" - not only in this forum - but in every venue wherein the topic has been raised is this: the presumption that "we all agree that health care reform is need".
To admit that the US health care system needs reform as a premise: 1) is neither unequivocally supported by facts nor does our system categorically unfavorably compare to that of other countries which have gone the route of adopting a nationalized health care system; and 2) violates everything we know about economics - whatever the school of thought in which you were indoctrinated. If you think you are not getting good value for the dollars you spend on health care then find alternative - oops, the government will not let us try certain things, e.g., holistic medicines or witch doctors for that matter. Rather, they have the AMA tell us what is good for us and everyone blames the insurance companies. By the way, another violation of Blonde's rule, the whole medical insurance thing was a scam which the medical profession including hospitals worked out as a way to "insure" they got paid. And, yet another violation of Blonde's rule: how can this bill be given any credence when the likes of Howard "The Scream" Dean, a medical doctor, who vociferously supports it while he shamelessly campaigns for the position of Health Care Czar.
The point is it doesn't matter what is in the bill - we do not need it; we do no want it; and, we have rejected Ted Kennedy's entreaties in that vein for 40 years.
The premise that the US health care system needs reform is false and we did not send representatives to D.C. for the purpose of creating innovative ways to take our money. Rather, we sent them to Congress to protect us from BIG government. We reject the notion that health care reform is a matter of NATIONAL - as opposed to individual - policy. This is a matter of principle akin to the notion that the King of England had no right to tax us no matter how trivially.
Arguing over the bits that should stay in the bill versus those that should go tacitly accepts health care as a national policy.
We should take some of our scribbling and get it out to as many local publications as possible before Barama does away with freedom of the press. We should campaign against every single representative who voted for the House bill and try to have them removed. We should petition our states to fight on our behalf to exempt us and, if they refuse, we should campaign to have our governors removed.
If all else fails we should exercise our rights to bear arms against the tyranny which this bill represents.
What needs reform are the
November 19, 2009 - 14:14 ET by Radical1979What needs reform are the rules that don't allow me to buy insurance from another state.
Or, ..., not
November 19, 2009 - 16:36 ET by HumboltOr, not buy it in any state; perhaps, ..., another country! You choose.
Or, ..., not.
Welcome, Humbolt
November 20, 2009 - 14:30 ET by Blondeto our discussion here. And as far as Blonde's Rules...there's really only one. No trolls allowed. All the rest of Part Deux (and Part One)...are merely suggestions and starting topics. You neither need to reply in that framework, nor need to apologize for not doing so. We've got a free-flow kind of thing going on here. In fact, with Part One, we had so many different places to start and things to discuss that it took us most of page one to sort it all out!!
I think we all agree that it is not the role of government to take over 1/6 of our economy in their attempt to "reform health care". We all recognize it for what it is, an outright power grab.
Having said that, though, there are legitimate things that could and probably should be done to smooth some of the inequities in our overall system of health care delivery. (Granted, too that the government has already overstepped their constitutional authority by providing Medicare and Medicaid...but that's a reality we will more than likely never get rid of).
So that we at least have a basis for including you in our discussion (you didn't mention whether or not you'd read Part One in its entirety)...we've come to somewhat of a consensus that there ARE things that the Congress could be doing to "reform" our health care delivery system on a global basis. 1) Enable insurance to be purchased across state lines, i.e. free the market. 2) Address medical malpractice tort reform (lose the lawyers). 3) Equalize the tax code to allow individuals the same preferred tax status when purchasing family insurance. 4) Remove some of the anti-trust regulations on physicians to form groups and negotiate openly with health insurance providers. 5) Crack down on Medicare and Medicaid fraud. For starters.
I would also suggest that our goal is to utterly defeat this travesty that has worked its way (almost) through both Houses of Congress, and to start over, in specific, targeted, meaningful ways to enact "real" reform which would allow all involved...the providers, drug companies, insurance companies, and consumers, to have the freedom to act in their own self-interest without onerous government interference.
Again, welcome to the discussion.
I hope he fails, too.